************************************************************************************************************************
We run the risk of being accused as Government stooges or UMNO lackeys (which we are not) by putting out this post. But Article 153 is clearly protected under the Sedition Act. And this young lady MP is questioning “Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s reminder to all Malaysians not to question “provisions in the Constitution, particularly those related to the “social contract.” And we need to get to the truth even on the third day of Hari Raya.
Is this another of the loose talk variety? Making fun of the Social Contract now? Fortunately she is not the kind that shouts in Parliament or who climbs a table, stands up on the table in full State Legislative Assembly regalia, and shouts to his opponents. Or is she like father, like daughter? Finds each and everything to “hit” at the Establishment. See the posting in her website reproduced below.
In the article below that is a UKM Professor’s explanations on the Kontrak Sosial. And in the subsequent article a Malaysian Insider lawyer reader provides explanations on sedition.
And, as the “law teacher” Azmi Sharom, is not done talking about the Constitution, we are not done talking about his views. The last article below made us ask: Is the law teacher “teaching”? Is he making fun of the 1Malaysia Youth Graduands and others? Given below are excerpts from his The Star column. See what you think of the “law teacher” and his writing.
And of the young lady MP who got the job largely due to people’s disenchantment with the previous “flip flopping, auto piloting and sleepy” administration.
And in the process, let’s ask: Where is national unity heading to?
As usual, let’s discuss these – perhaps when you have gotten over the holiday mood. Your views, however short or long, in English or Bahasa Malaysia are welcome in here.
For those who prefer to read only, do read the comments and our replies to them below those articles. Our counter-arguments to the unacceptable views expressed in the articles are contained in the replies.
**********************************************************************************
Social Contract, Political Contract, or Hit Contract
Opinion 2010-09-09 02:14
By NURUL IZZAH ANWAR
I refer to the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s reminder to all Malaysians not to question “provisions in the Constitution, particularly those related to the “social contract.”
The prime minister also said, and I quote: “Please remember that it is our responsibility to care for the country for our future generations. Let us not damage what is already in good condition.”
If we cannot discuss the “social contract”, then can we instead discuss the “political contract”, that should be built on a free and fair election supported by a functioning fourth estate, a free media?
If people cannot have reliable information, exchange opinions or even have their dissenting voices heard through a free and independent media, and vote for their legitimate representatives at all three levels of government — local, state and federal — in a free and fair manner, then what kind of “political contract” have the people be handed with?
It would be more like a “hit contract”, where only the people get “hit” with state propaganda and “hit” again at the ballot box through unfair electoral process.
Therefore, I wish to invite the prime minister to participate in an open and honourable discussion on election reforms and freedom of the media, which I believe would complement and assure the success of the New Economic Model (NEM) being proposed soon by the prime minister himself as announced recently.
If we still cannot discuss or debate on our “political contract”, then do tell us what can be discussed.
Finally, I humbly await the prime minister’s honourable reply
[ Nurul Izzah Anwar is the MP Lembah Pantai].
( The opinions expressed by the writer do not necessarily reflect those of MySinchew )
MySinchew 2010-09-09
**********************************
Toleransi kaum asas persetujuan kontrak sosial —
Teo Kok Seong, Profesor Sosiolinguistik Bahasa Melayu Institut Alam dan Tamadun Melayu, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM)
September 08, 2010
8 SEPT — Apa yang kini dikenali sebagai kontrak sosial, sebenarnya adalah persetujuan atau tolak ansur etnik antara kaum Melayu, Cina dan India, ketika negara mencapai kemerdekaan. Ia juga sering disebut sebagai pakatan kemerdekaan kerana permuafakatan antara kaum inilah yang meyakinkan British untuk memberi kemerdekaan kepada kita.
Oleh sebab logik dan pragmatiknya kontrak sosial ini, ia dimasukkan sebagai sebahagian yang penting dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan pada 1957. Ini dilakukan bukan saja menjadikannya semacam magna carta Malaysia, yakni perundangan berkenaan dengan hak dan kepentingan semua kaum. Tetapi lebih penting lagi, kontrak sosial ini adalah realiti mengenai kebergantungan antara semua kaum di Malaysia.
Tidak kurang pentingnya juga adalah hakikat bahawa kebergantungan ini adalah penerimaan semua pihak bahawa Malaysia sebuah negara majmuk. Dengan penerimaan ini, psikologi kenegaraan ikut berubah, iaitu Malaysia akan selama-lamanya menjadi negara majmuk dengan kaum Melayu selaku kaum majoriti/dominan dan kaum bukan Melayu sebagai minoriti, tetapi penting.
Kontrak sosial sebetulnya adalah manifestasi penting mengenai penerimaan ini. Ia adalah peraturan mengurus hubungan etnik supaya terbentuk negara bangsa Malaysia yang benar-benar bersatu. Ia diasaskan Yang Mulia Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Tan Cheng Lock dan Tun V T Sambanthan, masing-masing mewakili kaum Melayu, Cina dan India.
Topik penting yang terkandung dalam kontrak sosial ini ialah agama Islam, bahasa Melayu, kedudukan orang Melayu, kuasa Raja Melayu dan kerakyatan. Persetujuan terhadap semua ini sebetulnya mempunyai implikasi mendalam kepada semua pihak, baik kaum Melayu selaku penduduk asal dan Cina serta India sebagai penduduk bukan asal.
Untuk kerakyatan, permintaan bukan Melayu sejak sekian lamanya supaya diterima pakai prinsip jus soli, akhirnya dipersetujui kaum Melayu. Bagaimanapun, ia hanya membabitkan mereka yang dilahirkan di negara ini pada dan selepas 31 Ogos 1957. Bagi yang lain, mereka boleh memohonnya dengan menunjukkan bukti permastautinan (antara lima hingga lapan tahun mengikut tempat) serta kefasihan berbahasa kebangsaan dalam bentuk yang asas saja.
Implikasi persetujuan ini adalah jumlah penduduk negara daripada sektor bukan Melayu boleh meningkat dengan pesatnya. Jika ini berlaku, ia boleh melebihi jumlah kaum Melayu selaku penduduk asal, sekali gus menafikan mereka sebagai kaum majoriti. Ini adalah antara kekhuatiran besar kaum Melayu dalam mempersetujui perkara ini.
Walaupun begitu kesannya, kaum Melayu masih bersedia berkongsi hak kerakyatan negara dengan persefahaman bahawa kaum bukan Melayu pula akan menerima peruntukan yang bersabit dengan kedudukan mereka sebagai penduduk asal. Sehubungan ini, kaum bukan Melayu menyedari bahawa kaum Melayu memang ketinggalan dalam sektor ekonomi dan perlu dilindungi menerusi peruntukan sebegini. Ini penting supaya mereka dapat bersaing dengan kaum lain, terutama Cina.
Peruntukan mengenai kedudukan dan hak orang Melayu selaku penduduk asal, meliputi beberapa perkara. Antaranya, tanah yang disimpan khas untuk kegunaan kaum Melayu saja, pekerjaan dalam sektor awam yang dikhususkan kepada hanya kaum Melayu, pemberian lesen dan permit untuk bidang perniagaan tertentu dan hadiah biasiswa untuk tujuan pendidikan dan latihan.
Sehubungan hak istimewa yang diberikan kepada kaum Melayu, kepentingan absah kaum bukan Melayu tetap dilindungi. Ia meliputi kebebasan untuk terus mengekal, mengamal serta mengembangkan budaya, agama dan bahasa mereka, di samping hak ekonomi untuk mencari nafkah.
Berkenaan dengan Islam, ia adalah isu yang terlalu kontroversi. Islam diterima sebagai agama Persekutuan dengan Raja menjadi ketuanya pada peringkat negeri. Dengan ini, juga dipersetujui bahawa setiap rakyat bukan Melayu bebas menganut apa-apa juga agama. Walaupun begitu, usaha pengembangan doktrin keagamaan lain dalam kalangan kaum Melayu dilarang sama sekali.
Bidang pendidikan yang mencakupi bahasa adalah isu paling rumit dalam kontrak sosial ini. Pada mulanya kaum Melayu menuntut supaya diadakan hanya satu sistem pendidikan kebangsaan dan ia menggunakan bahasa Melayu sebagai satu-satunya bahasa pengantar. Pada masa sama, sekolah vernakular dibenarkan wujud sebagai sekolah persendirian saja. Ini bermakna ia tidak mendapat sebarang bantuan kerajaan.
Pada pihak kaum bukan Melayu, mereka mahu sekolah vernakular pada kedua-dua peringkat rendah dan menengah, diterima sebagai sebahagian daripada sistem pendidikan kebangsaan. Dalil mereka ialah ini selaras dengan kepentingan absah kaum bukan Melayu untuk terus mengekalkan budaya mereka, seperti yang dipersetujui dalam kontrak sosial ini.
Akhirnya dalam keadaan yang sering kalinya tegang, satu penyelesaian dicapai. Ia ekoran daripada kesedaran ikhlas dan pemahaman mendalam mengenai kepentingan jati diri kebangsaan dan nasionaliti yang dikongsi bersama, serta yang jelas pula sifat kebangsaannya. Penyelesaian ini merangkumi penggunaan bahasa Melayu selaku bahasa kebangsaan sebagai bahasa pengantar di semua sekolah kebangsaan.
Ia juga meliputi kebenaran penggunaan bahasa ibunda pada peringkat sekolah rendah dengan syarat bahasa Melayu diajar sebagai subjek wajib. Pada masa sama, ia menolak cadangan untuk menutup sekolah rendah vernakular. Sehubungan ini, kedua-dua bahasa Mandarin dan Tamil dibenarkan diajar di sekolah menengah dan boleh diambil sebagai subjek ujian dalam peperiksaan di Tingkatan Tiga dan Lima.
Sesungguhnya semua perkara yang dipersetujui ini hasil tolak ansur, selain keinsafan dan muhasabah diri semua kaum. Ia satu persetujuan dan kompromi besar pada masa itu, dengan mengambil kira pelbagai kerumitan yang wujud. Pada masa ini, ia masih perjanjian yang agung, justeru perlu dipertahan dan terus dijadikan asas kenegaraan. — Berita Harian
* Penulis ialah Felo Penyelidik Utama/Profesor Sosiolinguistik Bahasa Melayu Institut Alam dan Tamadun Melayu, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM)
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The Malaysian Insider does not endorse the view unless specified.
********************************
Yang kita tak perasan — Loyar Muda
September 06, 2010
6 SEPT — Isu rasis semakin hangat dan menjadi bahan berita bagi setiap media. Tidak kira cetak atau elektronik, semua berlumba-lumba untuk meletakkan isu rasis sebagai santapan utama para pembaca. Ironinya ia terjadi sewaktu negara kita menyambut kemerdekaan yang ke-53. Sungguh menyedihkan apabila isu ini bukan sahaja berpenyakit di kalangan ahli politik tetapi sudah menular hingga ke akar umbi. Baiklah, cukup saya berbasa-basi di sini. Mari kita pergi ke isu yang utama.
Pertubuhan politik mahupun bukan kerajaan begitu lantang mempertahankan perkara 153 Persekutuan Perlembagaan yang memperuntukkan kedudukan istimewa Melayu dan penduduk asli Sabah dan Sarawak (oklah “hak istimewa” lagi sesuai). Ia turut dijaga oleh Perkara 159(5) yang memperuntukkan izin Majlis Raja-Raja sekiranya perkara 153 mahu dipinda atau digubal. Ditambah lagi dengan peruntukan dalam akta hasutan seksyen 3 (f) Akta Hasutan 1948 yang memperuntukkan “A seditious tendency is a tendency to question any matter, right, status, position, privilege, sovereignty or prerogative established or protected by the provisions of Part III of the Federal Constitution or Article 152, 153 or 181 of the Federal Constitution.”
Justeru, barangsiapa yang cuba mempertikaikan apa-apa persoalan berkaitan perkara 153 mempunyai potensi untuk disabitkan kesalahan dalam Akta Hasutan.
1) Yang kita tak perasan:
Bukan sahaja Perkara 153 yang dijaga oleh Perkara 159(5) dan seksyen 3(f) Akta Hasutan 1948 tetapi juga Bahagian 3 Perlembagaan Persekutuan. Apakah Bahagian 3 itu? Pernahkah ada mana-mana ahli politik memberitahu hal ini?
Bahagian 3 Perlembagaan Persekutuan adalah berkaitan soal kerakyatan. Citizenship.
Nah, di sini sudah terserlah keseimbangan yang dijamin dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan. Sesungguhnya kontrak sosial yang berteraskan kedudukan istimewa Melayu dan prinsip kerakyatan Jus Soli telah dijamin dalam perkara 159(5) yang memperuntukkan “A law making an amendment to Clause (4) of Article 10, any law passed thereunder, the provisions of Part III, Article 38, 63 (4), 70, 71 (1), 72 (4), 152, or 153 or to this Clause shall not be passed without the consent of the Conference of Rulers.” Maka di sini jelas bahawa bukan sahaja kedudukan istimewa dipelihara tetapi juga soal kerakyatan berdasarkan prinsip jus soli turut dipelihara dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan.
2) Yang kita tak perasan:
Seskyen 3(f) Akta Hasutan bukan sahaja memperuntukkan tiada sesiapa yang boleh mempertikaikan atau mempersoalkan apa-apa isu berkaitan Perkara 153 tetapi juga memperuntukkan tiada sesiapa pun yang boleh mempertikaikan atau mempersoalkan apa-apa isu berkaitan Bahagian 3 Perlembagaan Persekutuan yakni kerakyatan.
Justeru, mari kita melihat secara saksama: kalau mempertikaikan isu 30% ekuiti bumiputera dalam sektor ekonomi mempunyai potensi hasutan maka sesiapa yang menyuruh orang bukan melayu pulang ke negara masing-masing perlu dilihat termasuk dalam potensi hasutan yang termaktub dalam seksyen 3(f) Akta Hasutan 1948.
Kalau sesiapa yang cuba mempertikaikan perkara 153 perlu dimasukkan ke dalam ISA maka sesiapa yang cuba mempertikaikan Bahagian 3 Perlembagaan Persekutuan juga perlu dimasukkan ke dalam ISA. Ini kerana sudah jelas menyuruh atau menghalau orang bukan Melayu supaya pulang ke negara masing-masing bererti menafikan hak kerakyatan mereka di negara ini yang telah dijaga, dipelihara oleh Perlembagaan Persekutuan sejak 53 tahun yang lepas.
Bahkan mempersoalkan relevan atau tidak sekolah vernakular juga boleh tersenarai sebagai hasutan sepertimana yang termaktub dalam seksyen 3(e) Akta Hasutan 1948 “to promote feelings of ill will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Malaysia”. Sila rujuk juga Melan Abdullah v Public Prosecutor [1971] 2 MLJ 280 dan PP v Mark Koding [1982].
Kesimpulan: Sila tutup isu ini. Sekali lagi dimohon: Sila tutup isu ini. Jangan lagi membuka atau cuba menyemarakkan lagi isu perkauman. Apa yang cuba saya nyatakan di atas adalah prinsip keadilan dalam membincangkan isu kontrak sosial yang sudah dipelihara dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan bahkan dalam Al-Quran sudah menjelaskan “Janganlah kebencian kamu ke atas sesuatu kaum menyebabkan kamu berlaku tidak adil. Berlaku adillah, sesungguhnya adil itu lebih dekat dengan taqwa.”
Semua rakyat Malaysia baik ahli politik mahupun kakitangan awam, siswa dan pelajar di bangku sekolah tidak perlu mengapi-apikan lagi isu ini. Jika tidak, kita semua berpotensi untuk didakwa bawah Akta Hasutan.
3) Yang kita tak perasan:
Isu ini hangat diceritakan oleh dua komponen parti BN — MCA dan Umno. Sejak kebelakangan ini kedua-dua pemimpin dari parti tersebut saling bertikam lidah dan mengapikan suasana dengan isu perkauman. Sesungguhnya inilah yang ditunggu oleh Pakatan Rakyat yang tanpa perlu berbuat apa-apa telah menunjukkan kepada rakyat parti mana yang sudah tidak relevan lagi, parti mana yang lebih suka bercakaran tentang isu-isu sebegini dan parti mana yang melaungkan slogan supaya bersatu tanpa mengira kaum tetapi wakil rakyat mereka sendiri yang bergaduh tanpa mengira kaum.
Pergaduhan sesama sendiri inilah yang telah melemahkan parti BN sendiri dan tidaklah mahu saya mengulas lanjut kerana ahli BN sendiri sudah bersuara akan isu ini.
(Rujuk di sini)
Daripada terus bertelagah akan hal ini, bukankah lebih baik mereka fokus dan lebih peka akan isu-isu semasa terutama isu kebajikan, suara siswa dan sebagainya? Kalau susah nak cari saya syorkan dua perkara ini untuk diselesaikan:
i) Masalah kerakyatan (rujuk di sini)
ii) isu kemiskinan (rujuk di sini)
Jika isu ini terus didendangkan oleh ahli politik Malaysia maka janganlah mengharapkan bahawa pentas politik kita akan mengecap tahap kematangan dan dimensi baru. Mungkinkah kita memerlukan parti lain untuk memerintah Malaysia? Atau mengharapkan parti yang sedia ada memerintah untuk berubah? Setiap undi rakyat adalah bermakna.
Kalau terus memalu irama yang salah maka rakyat akan jadi bosan dan pergi mencari paluan irama yang sesuai dengan kehendak mereka.
Yang kita tak perasan:
Pilihanraya nak dekat. Ahli politik tak sedar. Rakyat kuasa sebenar!
* Loyar Muda ialah nama samaran seorang pembaca The Malaysian Insider.
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The Malaysian Insider does not endorse the view unless specified.
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/breakingviews/article/yang-kita-tak-perasan-loyar-muda/
*******************************
Thursday September 9, 2010
Debates to tickle the heart
By AZMI SHAROM
If only new NGO 1Malaysia Youth Graduands and Perkasa’s Ibrahim Ali will come forward to defend their assertions that the Constitution has been slighted.
….
But that was just my stubborn northern pride talking because at the end of the day, lemang or ketupat, it is a small matter and to discuss the merits of one over the other is really making a mountain out of a molehill.
Which is rather like political party elections really.
It’s quite funny to see Azmin Ali and Zaid Ibrahim battle it out for the number two spot in PKR.
I never really understood the venom that goes into political party elections. I mean, you are all on the same team, right?
So, whoever wins, as long as it is the better person, then the whole team wins.
This being the case, there is no need for any viciousness, just a simple statement of intent and policy should be enough.
Then let the members choose. Simple.
Especially with the won derful one-member one-vote system that PKR has implemented.
Each member has a voice, and that is empowering.
I am sure they can make up their minds on who is best for the job without the need for big-shot party members making declarations of support even before nominations are in.
All these press conferences and declarations of loyalty look awfully 1984 (the book, not the year) to me.
Besides there is something tawdry and terribly sycophantic about making such premature public declarations of support.
Kind of like the kid in school who will go out of his way to please teacher.
No one likes a teacher’s pet.
Speaking of teacher’s pets, I really like the name 1Malaysia Youth Graduands.
It truly sounds like a name a group of teacher’s pets would come up with.
Anyway, 1Malaysia Youth Graduands is the new NGO that made a police report against the Bar Council recently.
This is because, according to them, some of the booklets in the Bar Council’s My Constitution campaign are seditious.
….
So I am not quite sure just what got 1Malaysia Youth Gra duands’ (oh, I just love that name) drawers in a twist.
It would be nice to see them debate with the Bar Council about just how elected parliamentarians voting to change the Constitution is seditious since the Consti tution actually allows for it.
Another constitutional debate I would really like to see would be between MPs Nurul Izzah Anuar and Ibrahim Ali regarding the interpretation of Article 153.
I know it is unlikely because Ibrahim Ali probably does not like to be beaten by one so young, and a woman at that.
Which is a shame because such a debate will be truly meaningful politically.
It will draw an intellectual line between PKR and Perkasa (and whichever other group that thinks like them), and this will inject much needed ideological balance to the political landscape of this country.
Such an event would mean so much more than yet another press conference over the PKR party elections.
It would even mean so much more than a debate over which is tastier, lemang or ketupat.
Kempen SSS 
Looks like the Loyar Muda is much better than the “Loyar Tua” (with PhD usually is more tua!).
Loyar Muda makes a point, analyses it, puts out the relevant facts, quotes the pertinent clauses and sub-clauses of the Constitution. Solid arguments.
He’s really “teaching” the public, making aware of the pitfalls and cautioning us about the law, and not making fun of anybody. He is a responsible man.
We should hear what Loyar Muda says and ignore what Loyar Tua says.
Agree with you.
Assoc Prof Azmi Sharom – No cv found under his name in Google, only in Taipingmali blog: PHD, School of Oriental & African Studies, LONDON; LLM, NOTTINGHAM U: Ll.B (HONS), SHEFFIELD U, UK.
AREAS OF EXPERTISE: Malaysian And International Environmental Law, Conflict Of Laws. No expertise in constitutional law to talk about the Malaysian Constitution.
AREAS OF RESEARCH: Primarily Environmental Law.
BOOKS ETC: No mention of books written by him. Wrote only one chapter each on environmental matters (one on litigation), in four collections of essays edited by others. Articles in Academic Journals: 5 articles, mainly on environmental laws.
But PROFESSOR DR. ABDUL AZIZ BARI, known as an EXPERT IN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW has not spoken in mass media about any faults in the Malaysian constitution. QUALIFICATIONS: Dip. Public Admin. (ITM), LL.B (Hons)(IIUM), LL.M (Nottingham), Ph.D (Birmingham), UK.
AREA OF SPECIALISATION: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, Sub-specialisation – Constitutional Monarchy.
AREAS OF RESEARCH: Constitutional law.
BOOKS ETC: Authored 7 books, co-authored 2 books, edited 2, mostly on the Constitution of Malaysia. Wrote a chapter each and authored / co-authored / editor / contributor in 14 publications mainly on the Constitution of Malaysia. Wrote scores of articles on constitutional and other matters in local as well as foreign law journals etc, reviewed 4 books.
hizan,
From the information you furnished it’s clear that Azmi Sharom does not have expertise in constitutional law to speak authoritatively about the Constitution or matters affecting the sensitive issues of the Constitution. His views are of not much value, equivalent to perhaps ours, and his motive in airing those views becomes suspect when he appears to project the views of opposition political parties and their sympathisers. He has praised DAP Lim Guan Eng and the Penang Government, he speaks for changes in the Constitution that an opposition group in Perak / Penang is said to have a draft of a “new” one, that the Bar Council wants changes made. But he has not said a word about the Sedition Act. That Sedition Act must be respected and not trampled when it comes to the sensitive issues enshrined in the Constitution, that Loyar Muda has taken the trouble to explain in his article published above.
Indeed Professor Abdul Aziz Bari has an impressive curriculum vitae. He certainly appears as a constitutional law expert. He specializes in constitutional law and his areas of research are constitutional law. What is particularly important to note is that he has authored 7 books, co-authored and edited several others. Wrote a chapter each and/ or edited some 14 publications and scores of articles in law journals etc as you pointed out. He has been tested and respected by his peers both locally and internationally.
Definitely what Professor Abdul Aziz Bari writes is more valuable. The fact that the Professor has not spoken about amendments to the Constitution like the Bar Council does, or call for a “new” constitution like the seemingly crazy group of people in Perak/ Penang do, speaks volumes on the integrity of the Constitution of the country as it now stands. Not that he is not prone to speaking up his mind – last week he gave an opinion publicly that the Regent of Kelantan can accede to the throne under the circumstances of the ailing Sultan. And the Regent was declared the new Sultan yesterday, Monday, 13 September 2010.
azmi,
The law teacher appears popular here but for the wrong reasons. Making fun of the 1Malaysia Youth Graduands Club as a teacher’s pet is unbecoming of a university lecturer. The new NGO made a police report against the Bar Council allegedly saying some of the booklets in the Bar Council’s My Constitution campaign are seditious. He didn’t say what changes to the constitution were being referred to and whether provisions pertaining to the Social Contract, Article 153 and citizenship clauses are involved and whether the Sedition Act is applicable at all or not.
It does not take a law lecturer to know that there have been amendments to the Constitution in the past and they were debated in Parliament. He should really have pointed out that those were amendments that were not seditious in nature. Loyar Muda have explained what is seditious and has provided cogent arguments. It would have been worth the university lecturer’s salt if he had picked out certain clauses of the Constitution that are sensitive to the the relevant sector(s) of the population, provide legal arguments to them, offer his opinion as to whether they can be discussed or not, much less be amended. Especially when there are a few people apparently wanting “a new constitution”, implying wanting changes to the whole constitution. So far, one has not seen him say one bit about the Sedition Act when talking about changes to the Constitution.
He is egging the Young Graduands, who presumably are of varied professions, to “debate with the Bar Council” which is a body of practising lawyers. He does not reflect reason and the thinking of a law lecturer there, too.
And he would like to see a debate between MPs Nurul Izzah Anuar and Dato Ibrahim Ali regarding the interpretation of Article 153. Clearly disregarding the Sedition Act which protects Article 153. And he offers rather childish thoughts by saying “I know it is unlikely because Ibrahim Ali probably does not like to be beaten by one so young, and a woman at that.” Goodness gracious. A university lecturer.
Just amend the Sedition Act to allow debate of Article 153. It’s legal right?
jebat’s friend,
The Loyar Muda article tells the scope of the Sedition Law. Even discussing Article 153 is seditious. You are being nasty and mischievous by suggesting an amendment to the Sedition Act in that respect. Others may not tolerate you. But we publish this comment of yours as well to show readers what a seditious, warped, don’t-care-what mind you have. After being explained what the Sedition Law is, you still talk about amending the Sedition Act to allow debate on Article 153. You should be hauled in under the Sedition Act.
Do remember that the nasty character Namewee and the Member of Parliament for Teluk Intan have only last week been questioned at the Police Station for seditious acts or utterances.
We do not think you deserve any more comment than the above.
It’s a question to understand better about whether it’s possible to amend the Seditious Act/Law. Defensive people like you just want to force everyone to agree with you. People like you are no different from those Perkasa folks. Do you want to waver your keris and start threatening others?
Well, if you can’t take comment that is not to your favor, then don’t open this blog to everyone. Not everyone is pro what you want.
Yeah not to forget to put those racist teachers/commentaters/bloggers/politicians who tell the non-bumi to go back to their motherland in ISA too. This is pertaining to citizenship too.
jebat’s fren,
Now you are accusing people of “forcing everyone to agree with you”. Quite free with your words, aren’t you. Loose gun type. Think before you say, especially before you write, man. You have the time to think or adjust your words and sentences before pressing the Publish button. That’s the problem with people like you. Quite glib. In the process you cause misunderstanding, or ill feelings.
Nobody is forcing anybody, man. We even publish your somewhat seditious comments, giving you some benefit of the doubt. Write in your arguments. But accusing people are not arguments. And bring in the keris issue and talk about threatening others. We have not accused you of Namewee-ing, have we? The chap did it does not mean you do it, too. So cut the crap of forcing, kerissing and threatening. Be responsible and make sensible comments.
What demented logic you are using. We have argued you back using salient points, you next accuse us of being unable to take comments not in our favour and suggest that we not open this blog to everyone. Stop accusing, man, just state your facts and justifiable, verifiable arguments.
You keep repeating about ISA on citizenship, etc. Obviously you do not understand what ISA is. Normally we would take the trouble to explain but your kind of thinking may not justify it. Read up about it and argue with cogent reasoning, although the ISA may not be on that basis as the Police have the sole discretion to determine what constitutes national interest on matters seriously affecting national security. That way you won’t be wasting readers’ time and a few may even be sympathetic to what you say. But not the way you have done so far, we don’t think.
So, do you think many UMNO leaders and the principal/teachers should be hauled in under Sedition Act?
“although the ISA may not be on that basis as the Police have the sole discretion to determine what constitutes national interest on matters seriously affecting national security” …. kind of arbitrary right? Is it really a good Act?
Looks like if one is on govt/UMNO side, one will hardly be charged under Sedition Act.
jebat’s friend,
Our lengthy reply to your comment of 2.16 PM in the UEC post also applies to this comment of yours.
jebat’s friend,
You do not understand the Sedition Act. We advise you to read it up in order to get the proper perspective and so that you do not get into trouble with that Act. You cannot plead innocence on the basis of ignorance. The law assumes that everybody knows the law. Everyone can be hauled in for breaking the law even if he does not know the law.
Do note that yesterday Nurul Izzah, the MP for Lembah Pantai, was hauled into the Police Station under the Sedition laws and and the Police are investigating her for speaking about Article 153. This was reported here – http://www.bernama.com.my/bernama/v5/newsgeneral.php?id=529639. This was in addition to the MP for Teluk Intan being investigated under the Sedition Act. And of course the Namewee fellow, too.
Do not ask for any debate on Article 153. Don’t be nasty, respect the Social Contract and live by the Constitution of the country fully. Read our lengthy reply to your comment at 2.16 PM and follow the advice given in the interest of goodwill and harmony in this country.
Salam Raya tuan admin,
” If we still cannot discuss or debate on our “political contract”, then do tell us what can be discussed.” kata nurul Izzah
sepatutnya disambung selepas itu …” yang boleh naikkan darah rakyat ? ”
Kan banyak lagi isu2 perpaduan yang boleh dibincangkan. Soal satu bahasa yang menyatukan rakyat…… soal 1Malaysia……. soal satu sekolah vs vernakular dalam konteks perpaduan….soal gossip artis….. soal buat kuih ….. soal fesyen tudung terkini….. itu pun nak kena tanya?
dinturtle,
Salam Raya kembali kapada anda,
Ini lagi satu orang yang nampaknya mahu mempersendakan Kontrak Sosial. Sebenarnya mereka tahu apa itu Kontak Sosial, akuinya dimasa yang lalu, sudah menerima faedah dari Kedudukan Istimewa Melayu, tetapi mahu jadikannya isu ha-nya kerana mahu menyesuaikan politik mereka. Ini boleh dijangka dari keluarga yang prinsipnya menjadi tanda so’al. Ayahnya “melawan tokeh”, lakukan katak lompat, mahukan Putrajaya dengan janjinya 16 September 2009, dikatakan telah memecah belahkan Melayu, dituduh liwat kali kedua sekarang. Emaknya dan dia sendiri mengatakan bapanya ada bersama mereka, tidak “pergi bermesyuarat” dimasa dan tarikh dia dituduh liwat tersebut, dan sekarang Nurul Izzah sendiri tidak hormatkan Kontrak Sosial.
Dia mahu bertikam lidah berkenaan istilah “kontrak sosial” dan “kontrak politik”. Rasanya dia tahu tetapi sengaja tidak pedulikan Akta Hasutan, mungkin memikirkan pihak berkuasa tidak akan mengambil tindakan diatasnya kerana dia Ahli Parlimen. Dia harus sedar bahawa walau pun dia boleh berkata banyak perkara diParlimen, dibawah “Parliamentary privileges” dan sebagainya, tetapi dia adalah rakyat biasa di luar Parlimen dan tidak “immune” dibawah Akta Hasutan. 2-3 hari yang lalu Ahli Parlimen Telok Intan telah diso’al siasat diBalai Polis Gombak dibawah Akta Hasutan itu.
Perempuan muda ini menang kerana pengundi dikawasannya banyak yang bosan dan marah dengan pemerintahan Tun Abdullah Badawi, tidak semestinya kerana sukakan dia, yang tidak dikenali dan bahru kali pertama bertanding. Dia perlu mencari isu-isu politik lain untuk dibincang. Meminta Perdana Menteri beri tahu dia apa yang boleh dibincang, walau pun secara retorik, juga menunjukkan pemikiran yang tidak begitu dewasa.
Pihak berkuasa perlu terus tegas dengan tindakan seperti kaatas Namewee dan Ahli Parlimen Telok Intan itu. Dato Seri Najib perlu peringatkan, malahan beri amarannya sendiri, kapada mereka yang mahu membincangkan, berlebih-lebihlagi menunjukkan hasrat menyo’al, isu-isu sensitif seperti Kedudukan Istimewa Melayu.
The Namewee wee wee fellow dah kenaq INVESTIGATED …… HERET KE BALAI POLIS …. BAGUS …..
The Teluk Intan Wakil Rakyat dah kena kenaq INVESTIGATED ….. kat Balai Polis …. Gombak … BAGUS ……..
GOMEN mesti buat lebih selalu … supaya SEMUA PIHAK HORMAT ……. TAK CAKAP IKUT SUKA SAJA ….. BILA BILA MASA SAJA ………
Abra,
Kes kes hasutan yang serius dan menyakitkan hati ramai rakyat negara ini perlu dibawa keMahkamah. Perbuatan Namewee diketahui umum, namanya jadi tajuk perbualan diseluruh negara, dia akan menajdi contoh teladan kumpulan anti-nasional dan subversif jika dibiarkan sahaja selepas di-so’al siasat. Tentu ada beratus saksi yang telah melihat videonya, yang boleh mengsaksikan merasa sakit hati, mendatangkan perasaan buruk diantara kaum.
Namewee perlu didakwa sehingga setinggi-tinggi Mahkamah. Kalah disatu peringkat, perlu dirayu kepringkat berikutnya, hingga ke peringkat Mahkamah Rayuan Federal. Kerajaan perlu gunakan dia sebagai suatu contoh supya yang lain tidak mengikuti perbuatan jelek dan anti-nasionalnya. Dia tidak hormatkan Perlembagaan, tidak pedulikan Kontrak Sosial, tidak mengindahkan apa nenek moyang dia sudah setuju dimasa sebelom dan apakala Merdeka.
Dia perlu berterima kasih diatas kerakyatan yang dipegangnya sekarang. Dan berpatutan dengan apa yang dimahukanya sekarang. Semua rakyat boleh bersuara. Tetapi ada caranya dan batasnya. Pesanan itu perlu diberi kapada rakyat jelata. Cara yang paling baik ialah dengan mendapatkan dia dipenjarakan. Supaya yang lain sedar seriusnya kesalahanya itu.
Aysay, need approval by Conference of Rulers, ha? I tot by 2/3 Parliament majority only. Like that huge process lor.
But in the first place got to pass thru Sedition Act first, correct?
So what those people talk about “new” constitution for? Mau bikin kacau, ha?
Aysay,
The important clauses of the Constitution have added protection to ensure their permanency. That’s why it has often been said the Malay Rulers and the YDP Agong are their protectors and saviours, and the Malays have high reverence for the institution of the monarchy in this country. Many Malays have stated their preparedness to die for the Rulers even though their role is merely constitutional, not involved in the day-to-day running of the affairs of state. All members of the Armed Forces swear allegiance to the YDP Agong and are, by necessity, prepared to die for him and the country.
Those representing the Malays during the independence negotiations must have used their mental faculties well. They must have insisted on the provision for the role of the Rulers in ensuring the permanency of the Special Position of the Malays. They were in consultation with the Rulers prior to the independence talks in London. Lord Reid consulted many groups and individuals when visiting Malaya and the Rulers must have been among those consulted. Those drafting the Constitution were surely aware of the fragility of the new Malayan nation based on a multi-racial composition. In fact, some Britishers have expressed doubts as to whether the Malayan political entity would survive the test of time.
Now 53 years on, it has survived. Pretty well too, economically, educationally, etc. But it is now disturbed by irresponsible people who talk about a new constitution irrespective of the sensitive Articles and the Sedition Act. That Act is another measure introduced after Merdeka to protect the sensitive articles of the Constitution and to avoid racial conflagration. Those asking for amendments on non-sensitive issues may be tolerated. But those wanting an entirely new constitution which may touch upon the sensitive articles must be dealt with promptly and severely.
They are mischievous and want, deliberately or unwittingly, to create racial tension, like that which provoked the racial clashes of 13 May 1969. That must never be allowed to happen again. Those touching on the sensitive issues stated in the Constitution must be charged under the Sedition Act. The authorities must not hesitate on this matter. Good that the Police have started questioning the Namewee fellow and the Member of Parliament for Teluk Intan at the respective Police stations. They need to book them in court and have them imprisoned to show examples and stunt the attempts by the nasty others.
The Prime Minister must be firm and repeat his calls for the rakyat not to question the Social Contract and raise the matter of the Special Position of the Malays and the original settlers of Sabah and Sarawak. Dato Seri Najib must also reign in the right wing in UMNO to ensure that they speak in one voice, like stated by the Deputy Prime Minister and Deputy UMNO President. Otherwise, Najib may not have UMNO to lead after PRU13. Or UMNO may have a new leader before PRU13.
Dato Seri Najib must be held responsible if a race riot occurs during his watch. The rakyat have spoken endlessly about controlling the wayward fellows by using the Sedition Act since Tun Abdullah’s time.
Yeop,
Dato Seri Najib has stated that the people should not raise sensitive issues, including on the Social Contract. He has made reference to such seditious fellows as Namewee. But he has not said in very clear terms that the authorities must haul up these fellows to court under the Sedition Act.
The Police have started hauling such fellows, including the MP for Teluk Intan, to the Police station and begun investigations on them. The momentum must be built up both by the PM and the Police to deter others from continuing raising sensitive issues. Those doing so must be prosecuted. In the article we publish above, Lawyer Muda has explained what constitutes sedition. Evidence must be obtained and where there may be elements of doubt, the benefit of the doubt should be given to the Prosecution in order to control the tide of seditious statements that come out everyday in the country today. The giving of such doubt needs not be expressed or written in official documents. The authorities have the discretion up to a certain extent.
Other than the Internet, the Home Ministry is directly responsible. The Minister has only just announced the formation of an intra-Ministry and intra-Departmental Committee to handle these matters. Let’s urge them to speed up the work and start acting on the seditious fellows. Questioning the Special Position of the Malays and the original settlers of Sabah and Sarawak is definitely seditious. Questioning the citizenship right of the non-Malays is also seditious. One begets the other. Nip them in the bud. Let there be a series of prosecutions on the matter. Let those who keep talking about Malaysian Malaysia without regard for Article 153 of the Constitution be extremely careful with what they say and do. We don’t want another May 13.
Similarly let’s urge the MCMC to act in the same fashion as far as the Internet abusers are concerned. Dato Seri Rais Yatim said a few days ago they are handicapped by the lack of an Internet forensics experts. They too are trying to set up a vehicle for an effective prosecution of the seditionists in the thousands of blogs. They should have acted more on the wayward fellows like those defacing the website of the Sultan of Perak some time ago. Put aside the one or two trying to be humorous like the poor Skodeng guy. Let’s hope they’ll do so from now on. We must have national unity and curtail the seditious fellows’ activities.
Sdr Abra,
Kita masih mahu melihat apakah tindakan selepas di heret ke balai polis itu. Kita tidak mahu soal diheret ke balai polis ini hanya dijadikan penyejuk keadaan dan lepas tu masing-masing lupa kerana tiada dakwaan dan hukuman setimpal dilaksanakan.
Dalam kes Hasan skodeng pula, begitu cepat kes ini masuk mahkamah tanpa terlebih dahulu diheret ke balai polis. Dalam kes kepala lembu Shah Alam, mereka dah dikenakan hukuman bukan?
namewee sepatutnya masa kini sudah merengkok dalam penjara di Kamunting ataupun Sg Buluh sekiranya tidak …….. dari negara ini.
Double standard? Kerajaan lemah lutut?
Kenn,
Pihak berkuasa perlu mencoba sedaya upaya mendapatkan bukti yang cukup bukan sahaja untuk yang diheret ke balai Polis itu didakwa, tetapi juga dipenjarakan. Mereka mesti menunujuk teladan kapada yang lain supaya tidak berbuat demikian. Melakukan tindakan mencegah atau “deterrent action”. Mahkamah pula perlu melihat perkara “benefit of the doubt” dari segi perlunya membendung tindakan anti-nasional yang boleh membawa kekacauan dinegara ini. So’al berapa lama mereka dipenjarakan tidak penting asalkan mereka dipenjarakan supaya yang lain sedar kemana mereka boleh pergi jika meneruskan perbuatan yang keji.
Perkara Hasan Skodeng itu adalah ganjil. MCMC memang ada kuasa. Tetapi kuasa mereka seharusnya ditumpukan kapada isu hasutan, membantu pihak berkuasa lain mengawal dan membenteras aktiviti menghasut dibawah Akta Hasutan. Hamba Allah yang hanya mahu berjenaka harus dilihat dari segi niat dan motifnya menulis rencana yang berkenaan. Dia pemberita, mesti tahu undang-undang berkaitan, termasuk undang-undang sivil saman menyaman. Tidak masuk akal dia berniat mencerca TNB dan banyak pihak telah menyatakan dia bermaksud berjenaka. Apa hadnya berjenaka? Diatas persepsi pihak berkenaan.
TNB beruntung beribu juta Ringgit setiap tahun. Ketua Eksekutifnya mahu saman NGO antarabangsa yang berkempen matikan lampu satu jam dibandar besar seluruh dunia. Belom berlaku hal ini. Belom kedengaran pengeluar-pengeluar tenaga antarabangsa yang mahu saman mmenyaman. Saman NGO samanlah. Tetapi hamba Allah seorang individu yang coba menggerangkan hati pembaca – Ya Allah, gerakan hati yang berkenaan menarik komplennya dan kalau tidak pun, janganlah dia didapati bersalah. Sudah banyak seksa dikenakan kapada hamba Allah yang tidak sepertinya itu.
Betul kata Teo Kok Seong, Profesor Sosiolinguistik Bahasa Melayu Institut Alam dan Tamadun Melayu, UKM, bahawa kontrak sosial adalah persetujuan atau tolak ansur etnik antara kaum Melayu, Cina dan India, ketika negara mencapai kemerdekaan.
Tetapi rakyat harus tahu bahawa itu membuktikan kesanggupan Melayu bertolak ansur secara luar biasa. Maka bukan Melayu juga mesti bertolak ansur dan patut, jangan coba perso’alkan Kedudukan Istimewa Melayu dan Dasar Ekonomi Bahru. Di masa Merdeka Melayu tidak dapat apa apa, hanya Kedudukan Istimewa mereka dicatit didalam Perlembagaan.
Kedudukan Istimewa Melayu itu telah ada sediakala, “from day one”, kata Menteri Penjajahan British bila membentangkan usul Kemerdekaaan Malaya diParlimen British ditahun 50an. Tetapi bukan Melayu dapat suatu yang bernilai amat tinggi. Mereka bukan rakyat dan “stateless” lk 100 tahun dimasa British memerintah dan sebelomnya.
British memang mahu lepas tangan. India sudah merdeka beberapa tahun sebelom Malaya. Hasil kewangan Britain sudah banyak berkeurangan kerana punca dari India yang begitu besar sudah tertutup. Britain sudah lemah ekonominya sejak Perang Dunia Kedua yang berakhir ditahun 1945. Maka mereka bertanggung jawab membawa masuk Cina dan India sebagai buruh untuk memajukan ekonomi Malaya bagi mengeluarkan barangan dan cukai yang dihantar ke England sejak abad 19.
DiAmerika buruh Cina yang dibawa masuk berkerja membina landasan keretapi dan diCalifornia Gold Rush dihantar pulang berkapal kapal banyaknya. DiMalaya British pintal tangan pemimpin Melayu suruh mereka terima sebagai rakyat mereka yang dibawanya masuk. Melayu ghairah dengan prospek mendapat kemerdekaan, memerintah negara sendiri. Tengku A Rahman disokong British secara melayan usaha usaha mendapatkan kemerdekaan yang diketuainya. Tengku A Rahman dilihat sebagai “liberal”. Hingga Singapore pun dilepaskannya kapada Cina, kononnya “tendang keluar” dari Malaysia, pada hal boleh dikawal tingkah laku Lee Kuan Yew secara mengikrarkan pemerintahan undang-undang dharurat (Emergency Laws) seperti dilakukan kapada Kelantan.
Rakyat Melayu pada umumnya menerima keadaan bukan Melayu menjadi rakyat Malaysia. Tetapi menjangka rakyat bukan Melayu berpatutan, hormatkan kontrak sosial sepenuhnya. Perlu elakkan cobaan mengikis hak dan kepentingan Melayu. Seperti diskaun permumahan Bumiputera dan 30% ekuiti Bumiputera untuk syarikat-syarikat yang mahu disenaraikan.
Dot,
So’al patut itu sudah menjadi ciri ciri budaya Melayu. Mereka menjangkanya dilakukan oleh sesiapa yang mereka ada hubungan. Apatah lagi sesama rakyat dinegara ini. Maka beberapa tahun yang lalu sejak pemerintahan Tun Abdullah Badawi telah timbul kelakuan-kelakuan yang nampak tidak patut. Bukan sahaja tidak patut tetapi juga melanggar undang-undang Akta Hasutan. Dasar Ekonomi Bahru (DEB) telah diungkit dimedia massa. Mahukan diskaun perumahan Bumiputera dihakiskan dan 30% ekuiti Bumiputera dibeberapa aspek ekonomi dihapuskan itu adalah sudah melampau.
UMNO yang ditubuhkan untuk mempertahankan dan memajukan hak dan kepentingan Bumiputera tidak nampak tujuannya kearah iitu kebelakangan ini. Sesangat mementingkan undi kaum Cina sehingga Setia Usaha Agungnya sanggup membidas Perkasa dan pemimpinnya dengan keras sekali walau pun Perkasa nampaknya hanya mempertahankan dan memajukan hak dan kepentingan Melayu seperti mahukan DEB didalam Model Ekonomi Bahru (MEB). Tengku Adnan bertanya jika Ibrahim Ali mahukan perang saudara atau “civil war”. Ini seperti mengugut, sekurang-kurangnya memperingatkan rakyat kapada pergaduhan 13 Mei 1969. Masakan Perkasa mahu mengadakan perhimunan memperingatkan peristiwa itu dibulan Mei lalu tetapi tidak dibenarkan. Dia juga ada mengeluarkan kata kata “civil war” ditahun 2007 dan dilantik keKabinet Abdullah Badawi ditahun 2008.
Adalah difahamkan bahawa pendirian demikian adalah pendiriannya sendiri. Dan beberapa pemimpin UMNO lain yang dikenali sebagai “right wing”, termasuk Ketua Pemuda UMNO yang suatu masa dahulu pernah menghunus keris diperhimpunan Pemuda UMNO mahukan 70% ekuiti korporat untuk Bumiputera. Dato Seri Najib dikatakan tidak ada memberi arahan supaya mereka menghentam Perkasa. Mereka adalah orang-orang Pak Lah yang coba “push Najib into a corner” untuk tujuan tertentu, termasuk mahukan jawatan dikabinet bahru yang mungkin timbul berikutan rombakan tidak lama lagi.
Tengku Adnan dilantik sebagai Setia Usaha Agong UMNO oleh Pak Lah ditahun 2008. Telah dibiarkan Najib berterusan dijawatan tersebut. Dia juga ada mengeluarkan kata kata “civil war” ditahun 2007 dan dilantik keKabinet Abdullah Badawi ditahun 2008. Dia tidak diambil masuk keKabinet Najib. Maka dia dan beberapa yang lain nampaknya mengatur langkah untuk mendapat perhatian Najib dari segi lantikan keKabinet bahru.
DS Najib wajar mencontohi dan mengikuti jejak langkah Datuk Onn Jaafar, apabila beliau sebagai Presiden UMNO tidak lagi memperjuangkan matlamat perjuangan orang Melayu dan Bumiputera apabila membiarkan UMNO berselisihan dengan Perkasa serta beliau memperjuangkan 1-Malaysia yang nampaknya memberi keutamaan yang lebih kepada kaum-kaum lain daripada Orang Melayu dan Bumiputera.
Kenn,
Memang telah menjadi perinsip bagi orang politik mengundur diri dan meletak jawatan apabila tidak bersetuju dengan dasar dasar atau hala tujuan parti atau pemerintahan negara. Pegawai Kerajaan boleh menyatakan tidak setujunya tetapi terus berkhidmat dan menjalankan apa apa keputusan yang dibuat orang-orang politik. Tetapi orang politik perlu menyatakan tidak setujunya dan, jika perkara terlibat itu besar dan menjejas kepentingan partinya, kaumnya dan negara, mereka sepatutnya meletak jawatan. Dato Onn Jaafar adalah contoh yang baik dalam perkara ini.
Nampaknya Dato Seri Najib belom sedar bahawa dasar dan tindakan yang dilakukannya sejak memegang teraju pemerintahan negara ini telah lari dari tujuan penubuhan UMNO, ia itu mempertahankan dan memajukan hak dan kepentingan Melayu. Contohnya: liberalisasi ekonomi, mahukan Melayu bertanding dengan Cina dipadang yang tidak sama rata, DEB tidak nampak didalam MEB bila mula diumumkan, dan sekarang belom nyata kesemua ciri-ciri DEB akan dimasukkan kedalam MEB bila dimuktamadkan nanti. Perkasa yang coba mempertahankan dan memajukan hak dan kepentingan Melayu dibiarkannya dibidas dengan keras oleh Setia Usaha Agong UMNO.
DiBritain mereka yang terlibat didalam skandal selalunya mengaku, meminta ma’af dan melatak jawatan. DiMalaysia patutlah orang orang politik balik kapada memegang nilai-nilai murni dan menunjuk perwatakan yang baik sebagai pemimpin negara. Presiden UMNO perlu coba sedarkan dan mengaku kesalahan tujuan atau cara mengejar undi. Masih boleh mengatur semula langkah dan ikut jalan yang tidak melebih pentingkan kepentingan kaum minoriti tetapi mempertahankan dan memajukan hak dan kepentingan kaum majoriti – Melayu dan penduduk asal Sabah dan Sarawak yang hampir 70% dinegara ini. Mempercepatkan kemajuan ekonomi negara tidak boleh dengan mengenepikan hak dan kepentingan Bumiputera.
“…. let’s ask: Where is national unity heading to?”
… and characters of the Weewee Namewee variety
… will always demand what’s in it for me
… and based on what nation shall this “national unity” be
… for we already disown whatever agreed upon that may
… by your forefathers whomever they may be.
… we are never any party to what this “social contract” be
… to whatever claim you place before me
… we will surely put in place a counterclaim
… as surely as everyone is likewise another pendatangs.
And we say ….
And most certainly as daylight is brought about by the presence of the sun
All characters of the Weewee Namewee variety
Are rewriting the land’s history
For they learned not proper history
In their SKJCs.
Dal,
As has been pointed out by other commenters, it is good that Professor Teo of the Institut Alam dan Tamadun Melayu, UKM, made it clear that Malays are the original settlers in this country and the non-Malays the later ones. He also pointed out the dominance of the Malays in terms of numbers, etc. Based on the explanations given in the book “Tamadun Alam Melayu” pubished by the Historical Society of Malaysia in 2009, The Malays, the Orang Aslis and the original inhabitants of Sabah and Sarawak belong to the same large family of Malays or Rumpun Melayu and they constitute nearly 70& of the population.
Though there are differences in religious beliefs due to foreign influence, they are the same in respect of language, one of the most important determinants of race the Rumpun Melayu has over 1,000 languages throughout the Malay Archipelago, the Malayo Polynesian islands and beyond, that belong to the same family of Bahasa Melayu, that has now become Bahasa Malaysia. In this matter, there is no two-ways about where national unity is heading. In the positive sense, national unity must head towards the use of Bahasa Malaysia as the National Language, in official and public communication. It is stated so in the Constitution. The Professor’s views about Chinese schools may be discussed further as we go along in this post.
Those anti-national characters like Namewee must be put behind bars. The seditious must be charged under the Sedition Act. The subversives and communist-minded should be ISA-ed – ISA is for them and terrorists in various forms. Those who attempt to re-write the history of this country must be prevented from confusing the rakyat and sowing seeds of discord and racial enmity. Saying, for example, that the Malays started the Larut Wars in the 19th Century and communist terrorist Chin Peng and the Malayan Communist Party (MCP) were nationalists creates ill feelings among people, especially those who had first-hand experience or knowledge of the atrocities of the China-leaning Chin Peng and the MCP.
The Larut Wars were started by the secret societies, thugs and gangsters brought in by the feuding clans Hai San and Ghee Hin. They fought for control of the tin mines and the gangsters killed each other, erupting into wars and dragging the Malay tin miners as well. The Malayan People Anti Japanese Army (MPAJA) were nationalists in fighting to oust the Japanese from Malaya but the MCP wanted to create a Republic aligned to if not under the tutelage of communist China, and were certainly not nationalist when they even fought the independent and democratically elected Malayan Government after the British colonialists have left this country.
National unity must be based on and come out from respect for the Constitution of the country. The Social Contract that was entered among the leaders of the major communities prior to and during the negotiations for independence from the British in London. It is duty boud for all who claim to be Malaysians. Respect for the Constitution is a measure of loyalty to the country and all Malaysians must be loyal to the country in more ways than just say I love Malaysia or I pay tax, because even the poor foreign labourers also pay tax by way of a levy charged for their work permits.
Mutual dependence on one another – the professor says, “kontrak sosial ini adalah realiti mengenai kebergantungan antara semua kaum di Malaysia.”
Non-Malays have important role – the Professor says, “Malaysia akan selama-lamanya menjadi negara majmuk dengan kaum Melayu selaku kaum majoriti/dominan dan kaum bukan Melayu sebagai minoriti, tetapi penting.”
Vincent,
Yes, it’s mutual dependence. And if that situation is disturbed, it may bring unhappy consequences for all concerned. Therefore it is necessary that all parties respect and maintain the status quo.
We should now get back to status quo ante. So much water has gone under the bridge and let’s start afresh. Don’t raise issues tocuhing on the Special Position of the Malays and the original inhabitants of Sabah and Sarawak, and don’t talk about the right to citizenship of the non-Malays. People can ask for more but must give cognizance to Article 153. It’s very important for the nearly 70% of the population. The Social Contract has been entered into at Merdeka when the Constitution was adopted, and again at the formation of Malaysia. Freedom and quality has its limits everywhere in the world. In Malaysia, equality must take into account Article 153.
True, the non-Malays have an important role to play in the development of the country. The Chinese have a major role in economic development. But it must not be at the expense of the rights and interests of the Malays and Bumiputeras of Sabah and Sarawak. The Bumi housing discount must not be encroached upon. The Chinese must not ask for the 30% Bumi equity be abolished without the Malays talking the same about Chinese citizenship right. Foreign investment does not depend on the 30% Bumi equity issue alone; there are a host of other reasons for the dampening of foreign investments, including political instability. Encroaching upon Malay and Bumiputera rights and interests does bring about political instability.
I am OK the Professor say
Sehubungan hak istimewa yang diberikan kepada kaum Melayu, kepentingan absah kaum bukan Melayu tetap dilindungi. Ia meliputi kebebasan untuk terus mengekal, mengamal serta mengembangkan budaya, agama dan bahasa mereka, di samping hak ekonomi untuk mencari nafkah.
I am not sure about Professor Teo say
Penyelesaian ini merangkumi penggunaan bahasa Melayu selaku bahasa kebangsaan sebagai bahasa pengantar di semua sekolah kebangsaan.
This one OK to me –
Ia juga meliputi kebenaran penggunaan bahasa ibunda pada peringkat sekolah rendah dengan syarat bahasa Melayu diajar sebagai subjek wajib.
Jimmy,
Mengembangkan bahasa tidak boleh melalui Mandarin sebagai bahasa pengantar disekolah sekolah. Professor Teo membayangkan ada kontrak sosial membenarkan sekolah Cina diteruskan dengan bahasa Mandarin sebagai bahasa pengantar. Ini tidak benar. Dia tidak ada menunjukkan bukti selain dari hal bahawa sekolah Cina sudah berterusan lebih 50 tahun sekarang.
Tetapi tidak ada apa apa bukti bahawa pihak lain bersetuju diatasnya. Pemimpin seperti Dato Seri Najib telah berkata sebelom Pilihan Raya Kecil Hulu Selangor bahawa sekolah Cina boleh diteruskan. Tetapi nyata diatas motif mahukan undi yang, selepas PRK Sibu pun, dia nyata tidak dapat yang dikejarnya. Maka sudah lama ada ramai rakyat yang mahu Bahasa Malaysia diagungkan sebagai Bahasa Kebangsaan dan digunakan sebagai bahasa pengantar disekolah sekolah.
Penggunaan Bahasa Melayu / Malaysia sebagai bahasa pengantar disekolah kebangsaan sudah menjadi semula jadi, berdasarkan Perkara 152 Perlembagaan negara. Tidak ada so’al tolak ansur di-situ. Ia tidak menjadi suatu unsur Kontrak Sosial. Ia menggantikan Bahasa Inggeris yang menjadi bahasa kedua dinegara ini apabila majoriti rakyat menyetujui keagungan Bahasa Malaysia dibuktikan disekolah sekolah.
Begitu juga kebenaran sekolah vernakular diteruskan tidak menjadi kontrak social. DS Najib yang menyatakan kebenarannya sebleom PRK Hulu Selangor tahun ini. Jika itu kontrak, itu adalah diantara dia dan pengundi-pengundi Cina yang dikejarnya. Didalam Kerajaan pun ada ramai yang tidak setuju dengan sekolah vernakular diteruskan. Termasuk Pegawai-Pegawai Kerajaan yang tidak boleh bersuara kerana mereka makan gaji. Sekolah Cina banyak dipolitikkan. Sehingga berjuta juta wang Ringgit dihaburkan disana sini pada hal Perkara 152 Perlembagaan nyata mengatakan Bahasa Malaysia adalah Bahasa Kebangsaan dan perlu digunakan sebagai bahasa pengantar disemua sekolah sekolah.
Selamat Hari Raya tuan.
Baguih le Profesor Teo tu kata –
“kaum Melayu selaku penduduk asal dan Cina serta India sebagai penduduk bukan asal.”
“kaum Melayu masih bersedia berkongsi hak kerakyatan negara dengan persefahaman bahawa kaum bukan Melayu pula akan menerima peruntukan yang bersabit dengan kedudukan mereka sebagai penduduk asal. Sehubungan ini, kaum bukan Melayu menyedari bahawa kaum Melayu memang ketinggalan dalam sektor ekonomi dan perlu dilindungi menerusi peruntukan sebegini. Ini penting supaya mereka dapat bersaing dengan kaum lain, terutama Cina.”
Jangan dema yang tak suka DEB pulak marah dia. Dia kan Profesor UKM diInstitut Alam dan Tamadun Melayu ke hape ke teman pun tak faham. Dia pakar. Gamak kamu nak lawan pintar dia. Mesti dia dah belajor sejarah lebih dari kita me.
Sayong,
Siapa pun yang siuman dan mengtahui sejarah negara ini mengakui bahawa Melayu sebagai penduduk asal telah sanggup berkongsi hak dengan bukan Melayu. Dizaman Kesultanan Melayu Melaka orang Cina tidak ada kerakyatan tetapi yang ikhlas mahu menetap disini telah menghormati peraturan dan cara hidup tempatan sehingga timbulnya masyarakat nyonya dan baba yang nyata ada sehingga beberapa dekad yang lalu.
Tetapi bila keluarnya diMelaka jenis yang dipanggil “ultra kiasu”, sesangat mementingkan diri dan budaya sendiri, tidak mahu menyesuaikan diri dengan keadaan tempatan, maka masyarakat itu mula lenyap. Timbul konsep yang dipanggil Malaysian Malaysia yang mahukan kesama rataan tanpa mengambil kira atau menghormatkan Kedudukan Istimewa penduduk asal, walau pun sudah termaktub diPerkara 153 Perlembagaan negara. Maka itulah sebabnya Kempen SSS mengesyorkan mata pelajaran sejarah dimestikan disekolah sekolah.
Pada umumnya bukan Melayu tidak menghalang tindakan affirmatif DEB bagi mendapatkan kaum Melayu mengejar kaum Cina yang sudah jauh dihadapan dibidang ekonomi dan pelajaran. Hanya segelintir yang menganut dan terikut sepanduk Malaysian Malaysia. Dan yang bertempiaran kerana kelemahan pimpinan, berbalah selama 1 1/2 tahun sehingga penyokong-penyokong mereka lari kapada yang berpolitik perkauman dan mereka coba mengejarnya semula dengan menggunakan politik perkauman, termasuk meminta hapuskan keperluan 30% ekuiti Bumiputera bagi syarikat-syarikat tertentu.
Nyata bahawa peruntukan peruntukan Perlembagaan yang sensitif dilindungi oleh Akta Hasutan, terutamanya Kedudukan Istimewa Melayu dan penduduk asal Sabah dan Sarawak diPerkara 153. Sebagaimana diterangkan direncana Loyar Muda diatas, pekara kerakyatan juga sensitif dan tidak boleh diperso’alkan. Mereka yang tidak senang dengan Kedudukan Istimewa Melayu perlu berhati-hati jangan mengungkitnya kerana akan menyebabkan yang lain mengungkit hak kerakyatan mereka pula dan ini tidak baik bagi keharmonian dan keamanan negara.
OK lah, since Loyar Muda says both Article 153 and citizenhip are both protected under Sedition Act, then don’t raise the matter of 153 and there’ll be no questioning of the citizenship issue.
Sher,
That’s the whole idea. All Malaysians should observe, respect and live by what you say. Do not raise the subject of the Special Position of the Malays and the original settlers of Sabah and Sarawak (Bumiputeras) and the citizenship issue will not be raised. Both are sensitive subjects. Questioning one will lead to counter-questioning the other and it will not be good for harmony and racial unity.
The New Economic Policy to assist the Malays was conceived from that Special Position. Whatever the argument may be concerning that, it has become regarded as a right and privilege of the Malays / Bumiputeras under that Special Position. Even arguing about whether it is a right has become a sensitive issue bringing counter-quetioning of the non-Malay citizenship. What more arguing whether the Malays / Bumiputeras are justified in getting the NEP affirmative action. It’s stark clear that the Malays / Bumiputeras are far behind the Chinese economically and educationally and deserve the NEP assistance.
Making noise over it has led to the weak leadership, which is keen on non-Malay votes, to marginalise the NEP. Malay NGOs have come out making noises in return. Unpleasant statements and rude words have been exchanged. These are not good for a harmonious and peaceful existence. The leadership should realise this and make amends.
Yet the Chinese have so much money and have been practising the traditional mutual help in their clan associations and business guilds. The articles above show very clearly examples of the rich Chinese helping the poor ones. And they have very many rich ones. They have vast wealth and control the economy of the country. Therefore they should be amenable to the Government assisting the poor Bumiputeras who hardly have philanthropists of their own kind to turn to for scholarships and the like. And there are very many of them poor, disadvantaged ones. Because they are the majority of the population.
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Tun Faisal, unit media baru PPUM. unit media baru PPUM said: MP ignorant of the Sedition Act? http://bit.ly/bODxDx […]
Although if you can locate a Casino that is certainly fairly worthwhile, possesses fantastic sociable feedback, and that returns
the dependable buyers pertaining to persistently playing their particular online
games, this might be any type of Casino that you would like to join.
The good news is, you don’t have to be worried about spending a whole lot of the dollars, or maybe money in any way, due to the extraordinary additional bonuses in which play at the best online casinos can give. Which consists of desert styled color scheme as well as wood made presented display screen, you are going to simply be able to visualize other people getting into cowboy caps with a bit of straw inside their pearly white’s while they shout, “Yee-haw” once they punch this rich using jackpots.
Nonetheless, within declares in which roulette video game titles
in addition to gambling will not be granted, you’ll be able to however gamble with the tire regarding lot of money if at all currently being enjoyed in a bash or with regard to fundraising nevertheless wagering or maybe winning money seriously isn’t granted having artificial income getting the regular denomination.
Some on-line casinos that do definitely not have to have a downpayment gives you cash to help enjoy if
you have what on earth is termed the “no deposit bonus code” or even a “no deposit bonus”.
While their spacious auditorium will be painted in reddish
and gold along with embellished with bas-reliefs, frescoes as well as sculptures.
If the Gamer incorporates a complete regarding 0-5, you visits
1 greeting card although stands about 6-7. Should the Participant failed to hit, the actual Banker strikes when he’s got 0-5, and appears upon 6-7. In the event the Participant received some sort of 2 or 3, the Banker strikes in the event that they have 0-4, and also holders on 5-7. If the Person drew some sort of four or five, this Bank gets if he’s 0-5, and appears about 6-7.
In the event the Player received the 6 or perhaps 7, the particular Bank gets in the event that they have 0-6,
and appears about 7. In the event the Participant drew the 8, the Bank hits in the event that he has 0-2, and
also appears on 3-7. Should the Player drew the ace, 9, 10, or face-card,
the Bank visitors when he’s got 0-3, and also appears in 4-7.
The first is called a new phone solution, which is an option that is purchased the
location where the individual feels which it may truly rise in value.
While men and women buy selection agreements, as long as they are usually “in your money”, your brokerage
house will probably basically spend around 70% (or
possibly more) if the commitment expires. The distinction having go back and also standard choices if we are usually dealing with your words “in the particular money” along
with “out with the money” can be there is much less danger, probably
larger payouts, and never the many misunderstandings normally regarding paying for standard options.
From appealing bonus deals in order to potent investing resources, winoptions will give you a
lot more than every other on the web brokerage.
You will discover just a couple of possible outcomes together with
these kinds of options that offers a limited come back for all of
which buy all of them. Investing throughout winoptions can be hazardous.
This is why investing in binary options risks is often a a lot less dangerous,
in addition to potentially a lot more worthwhile method to devote your
money. This Dow Jones in addition to S& R 500 can even be wonderful symptoms, and when your GDP includes a optimistic survey, or maybe should the US greenback movements up with importance when compared to some other currencies globally, they are fiscal directional transmission indications that you just can not dismiss.
When you can certainly stick with your current idea, along with carry on and bring about to your account routinely, besides will you possess the
life-style you might have usually imagined of, however you
will be able to help give up work along with self-esteem through
sticking with your strategy though trading from the binary options risks market place.
The truth is, broker agents can set several hit costs as well as expiration schedules because they would like, having
an experienced caterer towards the needs from the individual.
In this article, all of us will probably identify exactly what property and also products
usually are, in addition to exactly how possibilities,
in addition to binary options risks, relate with these kind of monetary market sectors.
Many baccarat lovers mess around using this type of guess yet don’t follow it. blackjack-fans can easily amuse independently along with 21, among America’s most popular Online Casino games.
9) Learn the regulations of the particular casinos online tournament you’ve entered so as to save unnecessary failures. The money will be how much money you must gamble with.
The goal of the partnership relies upon an upcoming purchase of a specific tool at the
predetermined price tag. 60 second options’s advanced investing podium implies that whenever you industry you are trading most abundant in up-to-date engineering on the net so that just about every price tag quoted, every trade performed, and also every single income gained from the securest program on the internet. In conclusion, should you be thinking about engaging in the particular 60 second options arena, you really should consider trading throughout the night.
It’s probably that just about any email unsolicited mail you get in relation to online Black Diamond Casino Online Slots can originate from over-zealous online marketers that didn’t mastered the policies yet, and not this Black Diamond Casino Online Slots on their
own. This program is just sold at an extremely several on the net bingo
internet sites (http //www. bingodrome. com) yet many of us expect you’ll notice this specific agreed payment selection turning out to be a lot more well-liked in the future.